User talk:Eärnur
Policy Hello, from your comments on the articles' talk page I can see how much you know of the wiki's policy, nothing. I strongly suggest you read our article on Canon before you make statements about canon. As you can read, PJ's films are classified as canon, whether you like it or not. Also, this isn't a clone of Tolkien Gateway, we do not want the articles on this wiki to be exact copies of the ones on Tolkien Gateway, as stated as a forum topic here. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with the pictures in the articles and they should not be removed/replaced.--Nognix 21:09, March 4, 2012 (UTC) : Nognix, for the record, I don't have a problem using images from PJ's films, but to only allow those pics in certain articles is ridiculous....WAKE UP PEOPLE, there are plenty of other quality resources to select images from. To only use PJ movies stills is boring and extremely myopic...unless of course you change the name of the site to the Peter Jackson Wiki Page-- Eärnur 23:33, March 10, 2012 (UTC) No I don't like it. To consider PJ's movie as canon is a an afront to Tolkien. While I enjoyed PJ's movies, and felt they were done to the best of his ability and given resources... one should NEVER consider a commercial movie as "canon".... even PJ would agree with that. Too many variables go into making a movie.... (run-time being the primary obstacle)... that disqualifies it as being considered "canon". The pic that I removed from the Uruk-hai page was not done only because it was from PJ's movie however, it was done because the page already uses 100% movie stills (with no other artwork) and also because the movie still in question is pretty lame. At the very least I'd swap it around with another movie still used towards the bottom of the page. JMHO. :Eärnur, while the the PJ films may contain non-canon characters and scenarios that do not conform to the book, the images that have come out of them are completely legitimate to use as pictures on canon articles, and as Nognix pointed out this is NOT the Tolkien Gateway. Those PJ photos are one of the things that makes us different from them.--DarkLantern 11:00, March 5, 2012 (UTC) ::Eärnur, you would be more then welcome to join Tolkien Gateway if you want. On Tolkien Gateway we see PJ's movies (and other adaptations) as non-canon, though that definently doesn't mean we don't include information about it. If you want to take a look, please visit: http://www.tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Main_Page --Thijs95 18:43, March 5, 2012 (UTC) :::This is disgusting. What a ridiculous attempt at leeching off another wiki's users. You don't go around advertising your wiki on other people's talk pages.--Nognix 20:17, March 5, 2012 (UTC) ::::Thank Thijis95, I created my account on Tolkien Gateway earlier today...and will also remain a contributor here as well. I need to try and educate the members here that PJ should not be considered canon, ONLY TOLKIEN can be cosidered canon. Just how it is and always will be. I will however refrain from taking any more unilateral actions like removing photos (i.e. PJ movie stills) from articles without first bringing it up for discussion in the talk section of said article. Again, I'm not totally opposed to PJ's movies or using images from it....it's just that they should not be used 100% of the time.-- Eärnur 23:33, March 10, 2012 (UTC)